[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080623235141.GB17297@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 01:51:41 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@...mvista.com>
Cc: linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...mvista.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -rt] ide: fix interrupts processing issue with
preempt-able hardirqs
* Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@...mvista.com> wrote:
> IDE interrupt handler relies on the fact that, if necessary, hardirqs
> will re-trigger on ISR exit. With fully preemtable IRQs this seems to
> be not true, since if hardirq thread is currently running, and the
> same IRQ raised again, then this IRQ will be simply lost.
actually no, that should not happen - if -rt loses an IRQ then something
broke in the threaded IRQ code. It's supposed to be a drop-in,
compatible IRQ flow with no driver changes needed.
( also, please do not Cc: mainline maintainers to RFC -rt patches, let
the -rt maintainers sort out the need for any patch propagation - once
the patches are sufficiently cooked. Thanks. )
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists